Because I can:
The link is crazy far down the page...I have no idea why. Click away!
Historical Background:
For this analysis I will be using a piece by Kate Nash. The work in question is the tenth track on her debut album: “Made of Bricks” released in September 2007. The name of the piece is “Skeleton Song.” In this analysis, I will be using the eclectic method laid out by Lawrence Ferrara to explore the piece in a number of ways. To start off, let’s talk about how Kate Nash came to be an artist.
Nash was raised in Harrow, the Zone Five burg of London. She was taught piano at a young age and her mother took her to Irish “gigs” and introduced her to classical music. At age fourteen she started getting into the music scene, heading to concerts at her local dive. As the years progressed, her tastes did too – bands such as The Strokes along with other forms of punk music influenced her greatly. “There’s a simplicity to punk music.” Nash says in an interview. This simplicity is seen in her lyrics and her music. A huge influence in her music is the artist Regina Spektor (listen to the song "Us") – she’s one of Nash’s favorite musicians and an inspiration to her piano and vocal styling.
Kate is part of the MySpace millions. When she was rejected from the Bristol Old Vic Theatre School in 2006, she began composing pieces in Garage Band (a Mac application) and posting her music to her MySpace page. Her popularity grew and grew, and it received the boost it needed when famed Brit singer, Lilly Allen added Nash to the “top eight friends” on her page. She was given a record deal by fiction records – and produced “Made of Bricks.” It was a whirlwind year.
Open Listenings:
The song itself opens with a drum-beat, and Kate’s voice seems to follow the bouncy nature of the piece. There is a direct address of the skeleton in this piece; it is as if she’s talking directly to him. The song has a very playful nature “skeleton you are my friend…” until the bridge. I’m reminded of School House Rock, or Avenue Q – a child-like song with a deeper/more satirical meaning behind it.
Syntax:
The song follows a traditional verse, refrain, verse, refrain, bridge, verse, refrain pattern (ABABCAB). The first verse is a combination of two verses almost (a bit longer due to the pause than other verses). The song is supported with a simple (what sounds to be a synthesized) drum beat, piano, violin, and a guitar.
The song opens with a series of descending, strung out soft pitches, and at five seconds a drum beat comes in. The piano enters at 13 seconds and plays along with the drum beat. The vocals begin at 21 seconds along with a rapid back and forth strumming of the violin underneath (the strings are highlighted during the vocal rests). At 39 seconds (the second part of the first verse), I believe a guitar comes into the mix (a bass...but I’m not positive…oh hearing loss, fun times). During the refrain (there’s definitely guitar here), the instruments layer in a crescendo and each has their own theme to play. The violin stop strumming back and forth and there are long held notes that combine with the piano, voice, drum beat, and guitar and create the “refrain theme.”
The verse and refrain are broken by the bridge at 2:13. A suspension of the drum beat takes place, and the vocals along with soft, trilling piano and a heavy bass line create the sound. The drum beat enters as the bridge crescendos into its climax of vocalizing at 3:04. After which, the recapitulation of the verse and refrain come in – at first at a slower tempo, but then increasing to where it was in the beginning. Again the song slows at the end with the echoing of the last lyric “that is all I know.”
Phenomenological Description of the Sound in Time:
The piece opens with a haunting moan which is soon replaced by a bouncing drum kick (A Garage Band sample maybe? Possible drum-track on her keyboard?) . The song turns into a Nursery School/Sesame Street rhyme almost with the jumpy lyrics and vocals that match the drum kick. Nash’s vocals are a mixture of Regina Spektor’s quirkiness and Bjork’s peculiar vocalizing (particularly during the dark, haunting bridge). Nash almost screeches at the end of the bridge, as she’s contemplating the murder of her friend. The scream of a banshee almost – I’m picturing yellow eyes and wind torn hair here as the shower curtain is being drawn back, the hammer is raised, and the poor skeleton is being smashed to bits by Nash’s pounding music and wailing vocals (very Bates Motel).
Nash pulls a just “kidding moment” in her apologetic return to her nursery rhyme crooning. It’s as if she was singing to Oscar the Grouch and got a little too carried away. The sesame street brightness is replaced by strobe-lights and smoke – and after the interlude Kate looks around, remembers where she is and who she’s singing to. There is nervousness and an apology in her “but…skeleton, you are my friend…and I could never bring your life to an end.” She ends, resolute – understanding that she will never be rid of this skeleton. A melancholy happiness creeps into her voice and the music drips with a resolve to keep life as is. The sound of strings sweeps us away to a peaceful ending, but a somewhat unfulfilled desire.
Textual Representation:
The lyrics represent a conversation, a questioning of Kate’s special friend. This skeleton has made her feel like an outsider, has caused unwanted attention as seen in the refrain:
“And now it's different
When I take you out and you
You've got me standing in an awkward position
With unwanted attention
And a need for explanation
And it's not that I'm letting go of you
But I dunno what to do”
The whole piece is an inner monologue/two person dialogue – explaining and reasoning with the dysfunctional friendship that she and her skeleton have. It even goes to a violent space during the bridge:
“And sometimes, at night
I dream of the most terrible things
I take a hammer and I creep out of bed
And I raise it high, and I smash your head
Fibular and tibular and ribs and cages, too
In fact, while I'm here, I'll smash the whole of you”
Kate is too good a friend to do such a thing, and the skeleton has been there for her as long as she can remember. She has described the relationship previously and the draw backs…but now she realizes that she’s all talk:
“But...Skeleton, you are my friend
And I could never bring your life to an end
Yes, Skeleton, you are my friend
And I will be there for you until the end
And even though when I take you out you've got me
You've got me standing in an awkward position
With unwanted attention
And a need for explanation
I could never let you go
And that is all I know”
Virtual Feeling:
The piece itself gives the listener a sense of nostalgia, but a fear of the present and the future. The skeleton can be thought of as a loss of childhood, or a sense of failed relationships (someone you just can’t quit). I personally feel joyful listening to the piece as it gives me the sense of a true friendship – I had a few skeletons in my life that would embarrass me, or put me in an awkward position. Some are smashed to bits and no longer a part of my life, some are still very much here.
The song evokes a smile. The bouncy, jaunty beat with the quirky lyrics can create a chuckle in the listener. A simple song, a common human relationship – these are ideas we relate to, and because we can relate to the ideas presented we feel certain emotions. The music is upbeat, and the lyrics are kind of sad – but we’ve all known this position before – so we can’t help but laugh at it. A ridiculous relationship, but one we can’t seem to get rid of because the other makes us smile.
Onto-Historical World:
Kate Nash wrote this piece in a response to her family and the skeleton in their closet. No deep dark secrets, there actually is a skeleton in the house – his name is Stanly. Her sister was a photo-major and would take the skeleton out for photo shoots and dress him up in suites and other fun costumes. Kate always thought this was funny, so she created a story. This girl used to be best friends with a skeleton, and that was fine when she was seven, but now she’s twenty two – and it’s strange now. In an interview – she relates the relationship to the film “Lost in Translation,” stating:
“I watched 'Lost In Translation' recently and it was really beautiful, it was definitely a relationship that just didn't fit in anywhere, and I like that kind of thing. It really could only be in Japan, like where they were, they could never go home and hook up. I'm not saying skeletons are intense or anything, but it's a bit of fun.”
The relationship only worked when the girl was young, but now – the pressure of her life can’t seem to handle the awkwardness that comes from being BFF with a skeleton. She understands that she and the skeleton will be in each other’s lives forever, because although he frustrates her sometimes, she loves him just the same.
Open Listenings:
The entire piece is a testament to relationships and friendships. They start off innocent and fun, bouncy like the song, but eventually there comes a point in which the darkness and frustration creeps in. If the relationship is strong enough, it survives the drive to kill each other.
The “bones” of the keyboard seem to mimic that of the skeleton – like playing on a ribcage, as Nash is bouncing these words off the Skeleton’s noggin. The song has an extreme innocence to it, but an adult quality – the knowledge of relationships and friendships and how society reacts to them.
I adore the unique vocal quality Kate Nash brings to this piece (thanks to all the conscious and sub-conscious influences that inspired her work).
Performance Guide:
I feel Nash has taken the right approach when presenting/performing this piece. She has fun with it, because it is a fun song. The light-hearted piece only has about a minute of darkness in it, and it’s back to sunshine and rainbows. A note for future performances of this piece – Maybe Nash could convince her Mother to let her borrow Stanley for a few shows? Bring the inspiration of the song out on stage! That would make the song even more fun to watch live (and more theatrical, if she sings to Stanley).
Meta-Critique:
I really enjoyed doing an eclectic analysis; I feel it is a great way to explore each of the meanings behind the piece. Thought at times, I feel that method is more objective than subjective. I understand we’re trying to maintain a balance by including each of these steps in the process – but just how balanced are they? The Historical Context is focused on the artist and the process and influences that created the work, the Syntax is focused on the specifics of the piece – both are centered on the music. Open Listenings – while we try to suspend our natural biases – we can’t help but include our own interpretation. The open phenomenological steps, and the hermeneutical steps seem to leave so much room for the analyst to insert personal bias, and make the work about how he or she feels about it – rather than what it is in general. I feel art is meant for everyone – and trying to analyze it leads to fascinating discussion and a greater personal understanding and appreciation. In that respect – the eclectic method is outstanding. We all take what we want from art – and from an analysis of art, as well. Each affects us in different ways – and that’s the beauty of it all. It’s been a great trip, and I’ll take away what I feel is important.
**All works referenced are linked in the Historical Background section.
